Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:13:52.000><c> more</c> tremendous progress and screening more tremendous progress and screening
• We see were responsible for screening.
• </c><00:34:42.800><c> the</c> period of time where we screen the period of time where we screen the applications
• doing a staffing assessment through a community<01:27:47.760><c> risk</c><01:27:48.000><c> assessment
• </c> everything that we do is an assessment everything that we do is an assessment between<02:13:33.840

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The commission did not assessment.
• </c><00:16:40.399><c> cases,</c> determined useful to the screen cases, determined useful to the screen
• </c> 354A21 to allow jurisdictional screening 354A21 to allow jurisdictional screening and<00:16:47.839
• </c> a screening mechanism. a screening mechanism.
• </c> include some credibility assessment? include some credibility assessment?

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee met to hear the Legislative Budget Assistant Office’s performance audit of the New Hampshire Commission for Human Rights. Auditors said the commission was inefficient and ineffective in investigating discrimination complaints and closing cases in a timely manner during fiscal years 2020 through 2023. The report contained 25 observations; the commission fully concurred with 24 and concurred in part with one. Auditors highlighted major problems with case processing delays, inaccurate case data, lack of a case management system, weak strategic planning and risk assessment, outdated and disorganized policies, confidentiality issues, expired administrative rules, fee-setting practices, incomplete financial-interest filings, and failure to complete required reports and reconciliations. Two recommendations, involving complaint screening and conciliation, may require legislative action. Several observations focused on the commission’s intake and investigation practices. Auditors said complaints may have been screened out before docketing, potentially preventing commissioner review required by statute, and that the investigation process lacked clear rules and guidance. They also found investigators were assigned non-investigative tasks, training was inadequate, interview requirements were unclear, supervisory duties were burdensome, and confidential information was not always protected by encrypted email. The audit recommended clearer administrative rules, better internal controls, more focused staffing, a supervisory investigator position, and improved training and documentation. Commission representatives said they had already made progress on several items since the audit began, including posting overdue biennial reports and moving toward a case management system expected to go live in June. They said they were working with EEOC counterparts and legal counsel, but emphasized staffing shortages and high turnover, noting the commission currently had nine people working out of 15 authorized positions, with three investigator vacancies and a vacant paralegal position. Committee members thanked the auditors and commission staff, discussed the history of the audit request, and raised concerns about how long the recommended corrective actions might take. The committee took no vote or formal action during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm going to stop sharing my screen, and I'm going to put up a screen for those of you that can participate
• You'll continue to see a screen that says, to the screen that I told you would present a QR code and
• And you'll notice on the screen, or if you are participating without looking at the screen, it has these
• And also on the screen are five petals.
• So I will put it on the screen.

Summary: The Massachusetts Commission on LGBTQ Aging opened its March quarterly meeting by welcoming its first full-time director, Alison Bauer, who introduced her background in state government, public health, philanthropy, teaching, and LGBTQ family advocacy. Commissioners approved the December quarterly meeting minutes, then turned to a presentation by Adriana Bullen on diversity, equity, inclusion, power, belonging, and intersectionality. Bullen led an interactive workshop using reflection, anonymous polling, and discussion to connect DEI concepts to the commission’s work, including examples from participants’ personal and professional lives and a brief history of intersectionality rooted in Black feminist scholarship and the DeGraffenreid v. General Motors case. The group then applied the discussion to the commission itself, identifying examples of successful DEI work such as listening sessions across the Commonwealth, targeted recruitment, inclusive trainings, the strategic plan, the commission website, and advocacy that helped pass the LGBTQI+ and HIV long-term care bill of rights. Participants also named conditions that support the commission’s power, including collaboration, commitment, openness, empowerment, persistence, and strong relationships, while noting barriers such as invisibility of older adults, limited racial and ethnic diversity, and lack of trans elder representation. Several commissioners emphasized the need for more Black, Latino, immigrant, and trans voices, and discussed recruitment challenges, including the difficulty of asking marginalized people to be the only one in the room. Bullen concluded by introducing an equity-lens tool for evaluating decisions and actions, using the commission’s strategic priority on representation as an example. Commissioners discussed whether to expand membership, create an advisory board, or use a broader network of organizations to cultivate future commissioners, noting that some changes would require legislative or procedural action. The meeting ended with appreciation for the workshop and a commitment to continue the work, with the next quarterly meeting scheduled for June.

Transcript Highlights:

• throughout the community, share information on their website, or hold special events to conduct assessments
• existing information about the child, talk to parents and teachers, and may conduct additional assessments
• creating a model comparing us to other states, but if most of those other states do not effectively screen
• true rate of these disabilities in society is not known because we don't have any kind of universal screening
• And I'm not sure if that's being put up on the screen somewhere. Yes, it is. But again, it's P.O.

Summary: The JLARC I-900 Subcommittee heard a State Auditor’s Office performance audit on special education services, focused on comparing student needs, district identification practices, and funding. Auditors said Washington does not appear to under-identify any particular population for special education, though districts face ongoing challenges with identification, documentation, staffing shortages, and inconsistent referral tracking. They explained that their analysis used statistical models because the true prevalence of disabilities is unknown, and found Washington districts generally clustered near the national average, with little evidence that any demographic group was systematically under-identified. The audit also found that special education funding has historically been insufficient, with districts collectively covering about $500 million in costs not paid by state or federal sources, and that districts spent about 26% more per student than they received in funding. Auditors noted recent legislative changes that removed the special education enrollment cap and changed the safety net process, but said it was too soon to assess their effects. Their recommendations to OSPI included clarifying what counts as an official special education referral, requiring districts to report referral data even when no evaluation follows, and ensuring the new statewide data system is developed with district input, training, and possibly a mandate for uniform use. OSPI staff said they concurred with the report and appreciated the work of the auditor’s office and JLARC. During member questions, Representative Paulette raised concerns that the audit did not directly examine prevalence of specific disabilities, such as autism and dyslexia, in vulnerable populations or compare Washington’s identification practices to medical and peer-reviewed prevalence data. Auditors responded that medical prevalence is not known in a systematic way, that educational eligibility differs from medical diagnosis, and that the report’s conclusions should not be read as proving no populations are under- or over-identified. No public testimony was offered, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> The purpose of a pre-trial screening The purpose of a pre-trial screening panel panel panel would
• </c> to assess. to assess.
• So, Chair, whichever you would prefer. screening. screening.
• </c> initial screening. initial screening.
• </c> additional uh screening. additional uh screening.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Counties are required to assess the Counties are required to assess these requests within 30 business
• However, our screening rates are very low.
• That screening found my lung cancer at an early stage.
• , even though those screenings are already covered without cost sharing.
• At the same time, screening rates for other cancers are much higher.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• On either of those electronic screens, you're able to instantly call for rider support.
• Additionally, there is a button on those screens.
• Additionally, there is a button on those screens that allows the car to pull over.
• It also doubles the base penalty and assessments for using a personal electronic device while driving
• Nancy is on the screen. And I was going to try to be on, but he had to take his wife to the doctor.

Summary: The committee held a work session on autonomous vehicles, beginning with an overview from the Washington State Transportation Commission on the state’s five-year AV work group. The commission described its 2018 legislative mandate, the 35-member executive committee and seven subcommittees, and the resulting 29 recommendations and “roadmap to the future.” The presentation emphasized six policy “building blocks” for Washington: agency readiness, public outreach, equity, safety, testing and pilots, and a path to deployment. It also noted current Washington law requires AV testing companies to self-certify with the Department of Licensing, carry $5 million in liability insurance, report collisions and violations, and notify local law enforcement before testing; three companies are currently certified. State regulators from California and Arizona then outlined their AV frameworks. California described its long-running permit system for testing with and without a safety driver and for commercial deployment, its current rulemaking to expand use cases to heavy-duty trucks and passenger shuttles, and new requirements for mileage, operational assessments, and more detailed crash and incident reporting. California also said it is creating a new enforcement tool allowing citations to be issued to manufacturers for moving violations by AVs. Arizona described its executive-order-based approach, later codified by statute, which allows testing and driverless operations through self-certification, law enforcement interaction plans, quarterly meetings with companies, and reporting of crashes or near misses; Arizona also said it tracks crashes monthly and has not recorded fatalities attributed to AVs. Industry representatives from Waymo, Zoox, and the Autonomous Vehicle Industry Association argued that AVs can improve safety, accessibility, and mobility while creating jobs. They described extensive sensor systems, community outreach, first-responder engagement, and current operations in multiple cities. Waymo cited more than 127 million rider-only miles and said its data show large reductions in injury-causing and pedestrian crashes; Zoox said it operates in Las Vegas, San Francisco, and Seattle and stressed its purpose-built electric robotaxi and local jobs; AVIA said its members have driven more than 145 million autonomous miles and that 26 states now expressly authorize driverless operations. Members asked about public education, crash and fatality tracking, enforcement, weather, school zones, first-responder interactions, and labor impacts. Labor and public-safety witnesses from the Teamsters, firefighters, and driver unions opposed commercial AV deployment without stronger safeguards. They argued Washington should not be an unregulated testing ground, especially for heavy trucks and hazardous materials, and warned of job losses for drivers, taxi and rideshare workers, and related occupations. Firefighters and driver representatives raised concerns about AVs interfering with emergency scenes, blocking responders, and creating risks in dynamic roadway incidents. Committee members also asked for comparisons to human-driven vehicles, data on citations and crashes, and more information on how AVs interact with pedestrians, first responders, and workers.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's a screening that's already done, and that particular screening is going to add two sentences that
• screenings to students, require the Department of Health to provide screening tools, House Bill 1150.
• Sam Jordan, student screenings to require schools administer trauma screenings to students, require the
• Department of Health to provide screening tools, 1150.
• of covered equipment; report on technical assessments.

Bills: HR84, HR85, HR86, HR87, HR88, HR89, HR90, HCR42, HCR43, HB1087, HB1088, HB1089, HB1090, HB1091, HB1092, HB1093, HB1094, HB1095, HB1096, HB1097, HB1098, HB1099, HB1100, HB1101, HB1102, HB1103, HB1104, HB1105, HB1106, HB1107, HB1108, HB1109, HB1110, HB1111, HB1112, HB1113, HB1114, HB1115, HB1116, HB1117, HB1118, HB1119, HB1120, HB1121, HB1122, HB1123, HB1124, HB1125, HB1126, HB1127, HB1128, HB1129, HB1130, HB1131, HB1132, HB1133, HB1134, HB1135, HB1136, HB1137, HB1138, HB1139, HB1140, HB1141, HB1142, HB1143, HB1144, HB1145, HB1146, HB1147, HB1148, HB1149, HB1150, HB1151, HB1153, HB1154, HB1155, HB1156, HB1157, HB1158, HB1159, HB1160, HB1161, HB1162, HB1163, HB1164, HB1165, HB1166, HB1167, HB1169, HB1170, HB1171, HB1172, HB1173, HB1174, HB1175, HB1176, HB1177, HB1178, HB1179, HB1180, HB1181, HB1182, HB1183, HB1184, HB1185, HB1186, HB1187, HB1188, HB1189, HB1190, HB1192, HB1193, HB1194, HB1195, HB1196, HB1197, HB1198, HB1199, HB1200, HB1201, HB1202, HB1203, HB1204, HB1205, HB1206, HB1207, HB1208, HB1209, HB1210, HB1211, HB1212, HB1213, HB1214, HB1215, HB1216, HB1217, HB1218, HB1219, HB1220, HB1221, HB1222, HB1223, HB1224, HB1225, HB1226, HB1227, HB1228, HB1229, HB1230, HB1231, HR73, HR74, HR75, HR77, HR78, HR79, HR80, HR81, HR83, HCR36, HCR37, HCR38, HCR39, HCR40, HCR41, HB368, HB433, HB1017, HB1018, HB1019, HB1020, HB1021, HB1022, HB1023, HB1024, HB1025, HB1026, HB1027, HB1028, HB1029, HB1030, HB1031, HB1032, HB1033, HB1034, HB1035, HB1036, HB1037, HB1038, HB1039, HB1040, HB1041, HB1042, HB1043, HB1044, HB1045, HB1046, HB1047, HB1048, HB1049, HB1050, HB1051, HB1052, HB1053, HB1054, HB1055, HB1056, HB1057, HB1058, HB1059, HB1060, HB1061, HB1062, HB1063, HB1064, HB1065, HB1066, HB1067, HB1068, HB1069, HB1070, HB1071, HB1072, HB1073, HB1074, HB1075, HB1076, HB1077, HB1078, HB1079, HB1080, HB1081, HB1082, HB1083, HB1084, SB111, SB122, SB195, SB221, SB404, HR1, HCR6, HCR19, HB27, HB81, HB134, HB154, HB163, HB170, HB194, HB214, HB217, HB220, HB254, HB259, HB290, HB308, HB311, HB360, HB382, HB401, HB410, HB417, HB463, HB514, HB575, HB592, HB718, HB723, HB750, HB755, HB776, HB812, HB830, HB838, HB844, HB882, HB885, HB888, HB950, HB961, HB966, HB980, HR15, HR20, HCR14, HB58, HB69, HB93, HB166, HB199, HB201, HB202, HB218, HB223, HB224, HB231, HB235, HB246, HB338, HB349, HB352, HB379, HB405, HB429, HB535, HB547, HB577, HB588, HB626, HB636, HB652, HB653, HB669, HB688, HB691, HB721, HB738, HB806, HB851, HB857, HB861, HB889, HB904, HB907, HB908, HB929, HB1009, HB13, HB23, HB25, HB32, HB41, HB90, HB120, HB121, HB122, HB127, HB138, HB139, HB141, HB179, HB187, HB213, HB247, HB286, HB332, HB344, HB357

Keywords: physical therapy, healthcare, prevention, wellness, education, Louisiana, landscape architecture, environment, public health, economic development, infrastructure, condolences, memorial resolution, tribute, Roger D. Boudreaux, Church Point, mayor, Louisiana House of Representatives, community service, local government

Summary: The House convened with a quorum, opened with a prayer, pledge, and national anthem, and spent much of the early portion of the day on recognitions and personal privileges. Members welcomed Reverend Dr. D. Edward Cheney, the Louisiana School Board Association, Southern University visitors for S.U. Day at the Capitol, former Representative Shirley Bowler, the mother of Caleb Wilson, a West Jefferson High School JAG group, the Louisiana Federation of Republican Women, and a Jeff Davis Parish delegation. The chamber also adopted a resolution honoring women legislators for Women’s History Month and observed a moment of silence for Caleb Wilson. The House received a large batch of Senate bills and referred them to committees, including measures on human trafficking, sexual assault kit reporting, bail schedules, environmental notice procedures, DOTD authority, judicial removal, school-zone and shoulder driving rules, workers’ compensation, kidney disease reporting, contractor licensing, public records exemptions, career-alignment dashboards, student health centers, sports wagering exclusions, gaming background checks, soybean promotion, and accessories-after-the-fact sentencing. Members also introduced numerous House resolutions and House bills, including measures on airport TSA loan assistance, Physical Therapy Day, Landscape Architecture Month, condolences, coastal protection, succession and paternity studies, and a long list of new bills covering taxes, education, health care, criminal justice, transportation, public records, and state operations. Several bills were debated and acted on. House Bill 69, concerning ignition interlock devices and penalties when used as a bail or probation condition, passed 82-18. House Bill 93, transferring Lincoln Parish jury commission functions to the clerk of court, passed 96-0. House Bill 199, extending the nursing home moratorium, drew substantial debate over nursing home capacity, competition, and patient care; an amendment requiring LDH to track occupancy and rejection reasons was adopted, and the bill passed 88-11. House Bill 201 creating a state seal of fine arts passed 98-0, and House Bill 202 requiring state civil service applicants to be notified when vacancies are filled or they are not selected also passed 98-0 after amendment. House Bill 218, requiring student questionnaires to include food insecurity questions, was introduced and amended technically, with debate beginning as the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• Internally, EJ assessments allow the agency to assess the impact of our decisions when we make decisions
• Internally, EJ assessments allow the agents to assess the impact of our decisions on impact when we made
• These assessments are just one tool.
• Process may inform your HEAL Act assessment.
• are the completed EJ assessments.

Summary: The House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee held a work session on HEAL Act implementation, beginning with an orientation from Environmental Justice Council member David Mendoza. He described the law’s purpose as integrating environmental justice into agency decision-making, community engagement, tribal consultation, strategic planning, and environmental justice assessments, with the goal of reducing environmental health disparities and improving accountability to communities and tribes. He also discussed the council’s role, the interagency work group, challenges with limited volunteer and agency capacity, and concerns about inconsistent assessment formats and future funding pressures. Committee members asked about council composition, including the balance of tribal, community, business, and other representation, whether the HEAL Act increases permitting time or costs, how “overburdened” and “vulnerable” populations are defined, and whether the council should be refreshed or audited. Mendoza said the statute is not limited to racial categories and can include rural and low-income communities, that the council has not quantified permitting delays, and that there is no formal audit requirement, though the council is discussing how to improve its work. Members also raised questions about the relationship between the Environmental Justice Council and the Office of Equity, with Mendoza saying the bodies are complementary but should coordinate more closely. The Department of Agriculture then reported on its HEAL Act work. Director of Equity and Environmental Justice Nicole Johnson said WSDA conducts environmental justice assessments for significant actions, applies an equity lens to licensing, funding, rulemaking, and strategic planning, and has completed 11 EJ assessments to date. She highlighted pesticide regulation, animal health, and weights-and-measures work as examples of environmental and economic justice, and said the department recently hired a full-time tribal consultant and has only 1.5 FTE supporting HEAL implementation. Members asked whether WSDA’s assessments apply to its role on boards such as the Forest Practices Board; Johnson said the department’s current understanding is that assessments are conducted on agency work. The Department of Natural Resources then presented on its HEAL Act implementation, focusing on strategic planning, community engagement, tribal consultation, environmental justice assessments, and equitable funding. DNR officials said environmental justice is being embedded in the agency’s 2025-2029 strategic plan, in its Community Access and Impact Plan, and in its advisory committee and board representation efforts. They reported conducting EJ assessments for sustainable harvest calculations, agency request legislation, and a prescribed burn manager certificate program, and said DNR has invested about $130 million in overburdened communities and vulnerable populations in fiscal year 2025 through wildfire resilience, youth education, and urban forestry programs. Committee members pressed DNR on how it identifies impacted communities, why landowners were not more visible in the process, how agency-request legislation is being assessed, and whether assessments are required for actions taken through other boards and commissions. DNR said its current interpretation is that assessments apply to internal agency actions, that some notices may appear on OFM’s notices page rather than the completed-assessments dashboard, and that it would follow up on specific questions about its posted assessments and process.

Transcript Highlights:

• The recommendations that you see here on the screen in that gold color are the ones where there has been
• legislative session, and they really graft pretty directly into those priorities on the previous screen
• OSPI and the ESDs must conduct a systems-level needs assessment...
• I have seen an increased amount of threat assessments as early as kindergarten students.
• When the legislature asked the University of Washington School Mental Health Assessment Research and

Bills: HB1634

Keywords: mental health, behavioral support, education, school districts, student assistance, 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The recommendations that you see here on the screen in that gold color are the ones where there has been
• legislative session, and they really graft pretty directly into those priorities on the previous screen
• OSPI and the ESDs must conduct a systems-level needs assessment...
• And I have seen an increased amount of threat assessments as early as kindergarten students.
• When the legislature asked the University of Washington School Mental Health Assessment Research and

Summary: The House Education Committee held a work session on the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Work Group and its school-based behavioral health and suicide prevention subgroup, followed by a public hearing on House Bill 1634, as amended in a proposed second substitute. Work group leaders Lisa Callan and Tisha Kirschbaum described the group’s statewide, cross-agency structure, its Washington Thriving strategic plan, and the goal of moving toward a more integrated “system of care” for children and youth. They emphasized that behavioral health, physical health, and education are interconnected, that families and schools often face a fragmented system, and that Washington’s youth flourishing outcomes show a need for stronger supports. Committee members raised concerns about regional disparities, rural access, language and cultural responsiveness, and the burden on schools and educators, while the presenters stressed that schools should be supported to identify needs and connect students to outside clinical services rather than carry the full burden themselves. Representative My-Linh Thai and Christian Stark then outlined the school-based subgroup’s work and recommendations. They said the subgroup meets monthly, includes students, parents, educators, providers, and agencies, and has focused on prevention, early identification, early intervention, and crisis response in schools. For the 2026 session, the subgroup recommended maintaining current investments in school behavioral health programs, strengthening statewide guidance on school behavioral health, and creating a coordinated technical assistance and training network for schools. They explained that the proposed substitute for HB 1634 would direct OSPI and the educational service districts to work with behavioral health agencies and community partners to conduct a needs assessment, map resources, and build a statewide framework for technical assistance and training, with public posting required by August 1, 2027. Testimony in support came from school staff, OSPI, behavioral health professionals, students, parents, and advocacy groups, who described high student anxiety, suicide risk, staffing shortages, and the need for coordinated, accessible supports. One witness from a psychiatric watchdog group opposed the bill, arguing it could increase labeling and drugging rather than holistic care. No vote was taken in the transcript provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• new report to the legislature based on the intruder detection audits and districts' vulnerability assessments
• , and requires a team conducting a behavior threat assessment on a special education student to include
• I'm not an expert on threat assessment, so I'm keeping my comments to the portion of the bill for which
• Our children need to be prepared for work in this century, but sticking school-issued screens in front
• So I'm very grateful. ...to limit screen time for all of our kids in Texas.

Bills: HB126, HB121

Keywords: election laws, attorney general, prosecution, criminal offenses, voting integrity, education, property values, school districts, comptroller, funding formula

Summary: The Senate Committee on Education K-16 met to hear testimony on a full agenda of education-related bills. Several measures were laid out and left pending, including HB 322 to allow JET Grant funds to be used for subscription-based and ongoing technology costs for career and technical education; HB 3062 to require fentanyl and drug-poisoning prevention instruction for entering college students; HB 121 to update school safety laws, including TEA peace officer commissions, annual renewal of certain safety exceptions, new reporting requirements, and special education behavior threat assessment changes; HB 3627 to let the State Board of Education chair employ staff; HB 5515 to curb inflated shipping and handling charges on instructional materials; HB 2674 to prohibit new state regulation of homeschool programs; HB 2310 to require a statewide strategic plan for early learning and inclusion for young children with disabilities; HB 367 to standardize documentation for excused absences due to serious illness; HB 1178 to speed certification for out-of-state educators and military spouses; and HB 1481 to expand cell phone restrictions to the full school day. Testimony was generally supportive on most bills, with some concerns raised on HB 121 about school district police departments investigating misconduct and on HB 2674 about how it would interact with the new ESA program in SB 2. HB 5515 drew support from instructional materials coordinators who described extreme shipping invoices and argued the bill would restore transparency and fiscal responsibility. HB 2310 was supported by disability advocates and early learning groups, who said a coordinated state plan would improve access and inclusion for children with disabilities. HB 367 was presented as a simple clarification to reduce confusion for medically vulnerable students and families, and HB 1178 was described by TEA as a modest pathway that would help bring experienced out-of-state teachers into Texas schools more quickly. HB 126, updating Texas’ NIL law to align with the pending House settlement and allow direct payments and pre-enrollment NIL agreements, received extensive testimony from university counsel and committee questioning about the settlement, recruiting, and future college athletics rules. HB 1481, expanding school cell phone restrictions from instructional time to the entire school day, drew strong support from parents, students, educators, and advocates who linked phones to distraction, cyberbullying, and mental health harms; one teacher asked for flexibility so phones could still be used for limited academic tasks. No bills were voted out; each measure heard was left pending subject to the call of the chair, and the committee then recessed to attend the floor session.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm going to stop sharing my screen, and I'm going to put up a screen for those of you that can participate
• You'll continue to see a screen that says, to the screen that I told you would present a QR code and
• And you'll notice on the screen, or if you are participating and not looking at the screen, it has these
• And if you're able to see the screen, you'll see the flower I'm referring to.
• So I will put it on the screen.

Keywords: 1212, all

Summary: The Massachusetts Commission on LGBTQ Aging opened its March quarterly meeting by welcoming its first full-time director, Alison Bauer, who introduced her background in state government, public health, philanthropy, teaching, and LGBTQ family advocacy. Commissioners approved the December meeting minutes and then turned to the main presentation, a DEI workshop led by Adriana Boulin of Fenway Health and Boston Pride for the People. Boulin guided members through an interactive “power flower” exercise to define diversity, equity, inclusion, belonging, and power, and to reflect on personal values, identities, and the conditions that support or diminish power. Commissioners and guests shared examples of successful DEI work in their lives and in the commission’s work, including listening sessions, inclusive trainings, targeted recruitment, the strategic plan, the commission website, and passage of the LGBTQI+ and HIV long-term care bill of rights. The discussion also included the history of intersectionality and how multiple identities can create both barriers and advantages. The group then applied an equity lens to the commission’s strategic priority on representation and inclusion. Members discussed the need for greater racial, ethnic, gender, trans, immigrant, and regional diversity, as well as barriers such as limited seats, appointment procedures, and the challenge of recruiting people who would otherwise be the only person of their identity in the room. Participants explored possible approaches including expanding seats legislatively, using advisory structures, and building relationships with organizations and potential appointers to broaden participation. The meeting ended with appreciation for the workshop and a reminder that the next quarterly meeting will be held in June.

Transcript Highlights:

• We may go through a through a home assessment. That certainly does not mean that.
• MNT involves a comprehensive assessment.
• Um, the agency usually does an assessment of, um, what is medically appropriate and evidence-based in
• Um, and we are screening for food. Um, transportation, housing security, and childcare.
• And part of that screening also, um, ask if they would like help with that.

Bills: HB 26, HB 140, HB 141, HB 142, HB 215

Keywords: Medicaid, nutrition support, maternal health, chronic conditions, pilot program, DFPS, Department of Family and Protective Services, child protective services, child abuse investigations, child neglect, child exploitation, advisory committee, Family and Protective Services Council, council abolition, foster care, due process, investigative procedures, child welfare, parental rights, family preservation services

Transcript Highlights:

• Our office published an assessment of these kinds of previous rounds of funding.
• We also have conducted quite thorough needs assessments from the department.
• Just to give a little context for why we did the assessment and maybe the purpose of the assessment,
• So we're able to then assess BHCIP awards to the extent of addressing that shortage.
• They also utilize clinically validated assessment tools.

Summary: The hearing opened with remarks from the chair and members about recent federal cuts to public health, mental health, family planning, and Title X funding, with strong concern about the impact on California programs and providers. The committee then turned to the Department of State Hospitals, which presented its 2025-26 budget proposal of $3.4 billion, including new positions, capital improvements, and funding tied to increased patient costs and incompetent-to-stand-trial services. DSH reported major progress in reducing the IST waitlist and wait times, said it had met the court’s 28-day treatment benchmark for those without extenuating circumstances, and described workforce recruitment and retention efforts such as residency programs, fellowships, outreach, and hiring streamlining. Members asked about future IST referral trends, SB 1323’s effect on diversion and community treatment, and workforce lessons in high-cost regions; public comment urged reconsideration of county IST growth cap methodology in light of new criminal justice initiatives. The committee next received an informational overview of Proposition 1 and its changes to behavioral health funding and governance. The Legislative Analyst’s Office explained that Prop. 1 restructured county MHSA funding buckets, expanded the Commission for Behavioral Health, shifted prevention and early intervention responsibilities, and authorized a $6.4 billion bond, including $4.4 billion for behavioral health facilities through BHCIP. DHCS said it had released guidance for county integrated plans and was receiving extensive public comment. Members focused on BHCIP application requirements, especially letters of support and tribal projects, and raised concerns about whether DHCS’s implementation matched statutory intent. DHCS said it had authority to set application requirements and that tribal entities were treated differently because of sovereignty and funding structure. DHCS then updated the committee on BHCIP, the Behavioral Health Bridge Housing Program, and related bond implementation. The department said BHCIP had awarded about $1.7 billion across five rounds, with more than 130 projects and 223 distinct facilities funded, and that it was preparing to award the new bond funds after receiving nearly $8 billion in applications. The LAO’s assessment found that more than half of awards served at least 80% Medi-Cal enrollees, but also raised concerns that the regional allocation model could reinforce inequities, that the program had not sufficiently addressed the highest-need regions such as the southern San Joaquin Valley, and that smaller counties and less launch-ready applicants faced barriers. For bridge housing, DHCS said more than $1.1 billion had been awarded, serving over 5,000 people and supporting more than 2,000 operational beds, but the Governor’s budget proposes to eliminate Round 4 funding as the administration weighs other statewide investments and Proposition 1 implementation workload. Public commenters and members urged more accountability, better regional equity, stronger labor and community involvement, and caution about funding for for-profit psychiatric facilities. Finally, the committee heard on the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative. CalHHS and DHCS described CYBHI as a broad prevention- and equity-focused effort with more than 1,300 organizations funded, over $2.1 billion awarded, and multiple work streams spanning schools, community programs, workforce, and digital supports. DHCS highlighted school-based services, the fee schedule rollout, and digital platforms BrightLife Kids and Soluna, which it said are reaching users statewide and providing low-barrier access to coaching and support. Members and public commenters raised concerns about delays in school fee schedule implementation, the large share of funding going to digital tools, the need for more in-person services, and whether the initiative is sufficiently tracking outcomes and equity impacts. No formal votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then we're also, the rules reduce screening. home screening criteria from 23 to 13 items, and also
• One of our roles... is to do provider enrollment screenings.
• This next screen shows exits from foster care, so when children leave foster care they usually return
• They start right away and that does a number of things for us. says they can quickly assess, is this
• The supervisor can quickly assess, is this person equipped to do this job in the long-term?

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• For CII, the bill requires assessments for large-scale projects.
• You know, maybe they have a water right, you know, assessments of that type of stuff.
• You know, maybe they have a water right, you know, assessments of that type of stuff.
• Should I share my screen, or...? Oh, I'm showing up yet. Hmm. Okay, so...
• Okay, so let me make it a full screen. Okay, here. All right, so you can all see my screen.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• for insurance coverage for screening of men.
• for insurance coverage for screening of men.
• Members, the House amendment simply clarifies that any prostate cancer screening coverage required by
• It also says the board shall assess fees on certain licenses.
• It ensures that a colonoscopy that begins as a screening remains classified as a screening, even if a

Bills: SR125, SCR70, SCR12, HB4, HB251, HB623, HB819, HB944, HB986, HB1098, HB1222, HB1257, HB221, HCR58, SCR22, SCR24, SB29, SB30, SB32, SB41, SB42, SB43, SB47, SB84, SB93, SB113, SB192, SB199, SB219, SB220, SB221, SB222, SB241, SB253, SB255, SB289, SB292, SB306, SB314, SB351, SB399, SB404, SB14, SB102, SB133, SB151, SB165, SB169, SB170, SB200, SB217, SB280, SB291, SB300, SB303, SB330, SB449, SB489, SB521, SB45, SB156, SB181, SB203, SB274, SB304, SB379, SB396, SB410, SB425, SB427, SB436, SB424, SCR61, SCR9, SB35, SB65, SB215, SB246, SB249, SB269, SB282, SB296, SB323, SB363, SB369, SB474, SB490, SB492, SB500, HCR31, HB296, HB299, HB322, HB364, HB519, HB535, HB538, HB568, HB571, HB622, HB635, HB676, HB772, HB784, HB1006, HB1018, HB1043, HB1070, HB1134, HB1239, HB62, HB193, HB203, HB210, HB220, HB228, HB246, HB420, HB475, HB486, HB574, HB584, HB750, HB813, HB815, HB826, HB870, HB949, HB953, HB1045, HB1092, HB1151, HB1162, HB1176, HB1177, HB1196, HB1214, HB1241, HB22, HB28, HB33, HB41, HB47, HB87, HB115, HB162, HB195, HB214, HB217, HB233, HB283, HB290, HB319, HB324, HB345, HB362, HB363, HB368, HB377, HB380, HB382, HB386, HB392, HB406, HB431, HB441, HB466, HB503, HB533, HB559, HB575, HB590, HB593, HB618, HB636, HB655, HB664, HB685, HB692, HB707, HB715, HB732, HB738, HB741, HB748, HB776, HB807, HB822, HB856, HB860, HB868, HB887, HB888, HB905, HB908, HB961, HB980, HB990, HB992, HB999, HB1000, HB1010, HB1146, HB1157, HB1233, HB1236, HB1243, HB54, HB137, HB180, HB192, HB310, HB321, HB396, HB512, HB552, HB578, HB638, HB663, HB708, HB717, HB718, HB1009, HB1082, HB1104, HB1107, HB1198, HB1246, HB1250, HB17, HB36, HB73, HB119, HB126, HB129, HB133, HB140, HB159, HB166, HB211, HB226, HB245, HB271, HB280, HB337, HB351, HB354, HB399, HB677, HB712, HB723, HB726, HB728, HB759, HB789, HB844, HB850, HB966, HB1036, SB149, SB382, SB441, HB134, HB258, HB359, HB782

Keywords: SR125, Senate Resolution 125, MUSV, Medium Unmanned Surface Vessel, MASC, Modular Attack Surface Craft, Conrad Shipyard, Morgan City, Louisiana shipbuilding, U.S. Navy, Department of the Navy, unmanned naval vessels, autonomous ships, defense procurement, military contracting, shipyard jobs, maritime workforce, advanced manufacturing, robotics, software engineering

Transcript Highlights:

• What you got to do is do a damage assessment. So, we rapidly did damage assessment.
• </c> damage assessment. damage assessment.
• </c> initial assessment capability. initial assessment capability.
• </c><01:06:52.680><c> So,</c> up on the screen. So, up on the screen.
• </c> assessment for the second Kona low. assessment for the second Kona low.

Bills: SCR21, SCR75, SCR50, SCR149, SCR47, SCR163, SCR169, SCR170

Keywords: healthcare, rural clinic, feasibility study, access to care, community health, Volcano community, Hawaiʻi Health Systems Corporation, emergency services, health assessment, Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders, health care, interdepartmental collaboration, public awareness, support services, education, health insurance, affordable healthcare, working group, Hawaii Health Plan, Medicaid expansion

Transcript Highlights:

• So, PreK presentation's on your screen.
• </c><00:18:23.600><c> than</c> kindergarten readiness assessments than kindergarten readiness assessments
• </c> first year as you can see on your screen first year as you can see on your screen is<00:20:26.880
• How are they third grade assessments?
• </c> doing on their eighth grade assessments? doing on their eighth grade assessments?

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The subcommittee met without a quorum and first heard from Kentucky Department of Education officials on career and technical education funding. KDE explained that House Bill 499 created a CTE funding formula using 60% weighted full-time equivalent enrollment and 40% incentives, but House Bill 6’s budget language excluded area technology centers (ATCs) from that supplemental funding. KDE requested approval of an additional budget request of $14,789,352 in each fiscal year 2027 and 2028 to include ATCs in the formula and hold local districts harmless. Officials said ATCs serve students from 117 of Kentucky’s 171 districts and argued the change would reduce funding disparities and better reflect the return on investment from CTE programs, citing growth in dual credit and work-based learning participation. Members asked whether the issue would need to be revisited each budget cycle. KDE responded that the problem could be fixed by removing the notwithstanding language from the budget bill, which they said would allow ATCs to be included under the existing statute. Representative Klein supported the request, saying the current clause could lead to stagnation and that the committee should help the program continue to grow. No vote was taken on the CTE item during the portion of the meeting provided. The committee then heard a presentation from PreK for All on expanding preschool access in Kentucky. Advocates said the state’s preschool program has been funded since 1990 and currently serves about 14,200 children at roughly $84 million per year, but that many working families still fall into a coverage gap. They proposed expanding eligibility to 250% of the federal poverty line, which they said would add about 9,600 children at a cost of $40 million in year two, after a planning year. The proposal also included regulatory flexibility for classrooms and partnerships with private child care providers and nonprofits, with speakers emphasizing child care deserts in some counties and citing research that early learning improves kindergarten readiness and later outcomes. No action or vote was taken on the preschool proposal in the transcript provided.